Agenda item

Planning Applications

To see Letters of Representation and further
supplementary information relating to any of the Applications on
the agenda, please select the following link and enter the relevant
Planning Reference number: http://apps.southhams.gov.uk/PlanningSearchMVC/

Minutes:

DM.54/18

The Committee considered the details
of the planning applications prepared by the Planning Case Officers
as presented in the agenda papers, and considered also the comments
of Town and Parish Councils together with other representations
received, which were listed within the presented agenda reports,
and RESOLVED that:

Case Officer Update: Consultation period for
final revisions ended 8 February, 2019, after publication of
report. 26 late letters of
representation received raising a few additional points such as
concerns over light pollution, unattractive proposal, clarity
sought on specification of privacy glass, clarification on distance
of proposal from Cliff House and finally the proposal claiming it
was not major development. In response
to the final point, the case officer explained the difference
between major development as set out in the Town and Country
Planning Act and the definition of major development in the AONB as
set out in the NPPF.

Recommendation: Delegate to Head of Development
Management Practice (HoP), in
conjunction with Chairman to conditionally grant planning
permission, subject to a Section 106 legal obligation.

However, in the event that the Section 106 legal Agreement remains
unsigned six months after this resolution, that the application is
reviewed by the HoP, in consultation
with the Chairman of the Committee, and if no progress is being
made delegated authority is given to the HoP to refuse to application in the absence of an
agreed S106 Agreement.

During debate, Members referred to the points made by the Parish
Council, particularly the high level of second homes already in
Hope Cove, that the proposal did not offer any affordable housing,
nor any contribution. The increased
footprint of the building would adversely impact the AONB, which
deserved the highest protection, and the parking proposals were
inadequate, and would exacerbate current difficulties along Grand
View Road. Members felt that the
proposal was trying to ‘cram’ too much into the space,
and did not see the need for five properties, a fewer number would
be more reasonable. The proposal would
also result in overlooking and a detrimental impact on the
neighbour amenity of the neighbours at The Cove.

Committee Decision: Refusal

Reasons:

1. Having regard to the scale, massing, design and siting of the
proposed development it fails to conserve and enhance the landscape
and scenic beauty of this part of the South Devon Area of
Outstanding Natural Beauty and is out of character with the area.
As such the proposed development is contrary to Policies DP1, DP2,
CS7 and CS9 of the South Hams LDF Development Plan Policies and
Policies DEV10, DEV20, DEV24 and DEV27 of the emerging Plymouth and
South West Devon Joint Local Plan and the National Planning Policy
Framework in particular paras 127, 130, 170, 172 and 173.

2. Having regard to the extent to which the proposed development
fills the plot, the number of apartments to be provided and
inadequate provision of on-site parking the proposal represents an
overdevelopment of the site that is likely to lead to over-spill
parking onto the adjacent road(s) causing inconvenience to users of
the highway and adversely impacting on residential amenity. As such
the proposed development is contrary to Policies DP1 and DP7 of the
adopted South Hams LDF Development Plan Policies and Policies DEV
20 and DEV31 of the emerging Plymouth and South West Devon Joint
Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework in particular
paragraphs 127 and 102.

3. Having regard to the scale, massing and siting of the proposed
development it will have an overbearing impact on and result in an
unacceptable level of overlooking to its neighbours to the south
and east of the site. As such the proposed development is contrary
to Policy DP3 of the adopted South Hams LDF Development Plan
Policies and Policy DEV1 of the emerging Plymouth and South West
Devon Joint Local Plan.

b)4412/17/ARM Land at SX 550 552, North
of Canes Orchard, Brixton

Parish: Brixton

Reserved Matters application for the approval of appearance,
landscaping, scale and layout for 29no. dwellings

Case Officer Update:
Conditions updated and an additional condition related to play
equipment being agreed in consultation with the Parish Council.

During debate, Members made reference to the site visit and
generally felt that the proposed design was poor. The indicative layout presented at Outline stage
had not included a terrace that was created ‘back to
back’ with existing properties in Phase Two, but this was
included in the proposal for approval.
Members felt this represented poor design, and also felt that the
play area should not be placed in the top corner of the site, the
location being unsympathetic to those who would benefit from
it. Generally the layout had been ill
thought through.

Committee Decision:Refusal

Reasons:

1. Having regard to the
layout and design of the proposed development including the remote
location of the public open space in the north eastern corner of
the site and its limited natural surveillance, the proposed
development does not represent high quality design. As such the
proposed development is contrary to policies DP1 and CS7 of the
adopted development plan and DEV20 of the emerging Plymouth and
South West Devon Joint Local Plan and the National Planning Policy
Framework, in particular paragraphs 127 and 130.

2. Having regard to the siting and scale of the proposed houses
adjacent to the southern site boundary the proposed development
will have an overbearing impact on and cause overlooking to the
existing houses to the south of site, adversely impacting on their
residential amenity. As such the proposed development is contrary
to Policy DP3 of the adopted development plan and Policy DEV1 of
the emerging Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan.

c)3460/17/OPALutterburn Farm, Lutterburn Street, Ugborough

Parish: Ugborough

Outline application with some matters reserved for 7 self-build
customer build dwellings (five open market and two affordable
self-build plots)

Case Officer Update:
Two further letters of representation had been received suggesting
additional conditions, some of which could be incorporated into the
Construction Management Plan

Delegate
to HoP Lead Development Management, in
conjunction with Chairman to conditionally grant planning
permission, subject to a Section 106 legal obligation.

However,
in the event that the Section 106 legal Agreement remains unsigned
six months after this resolution, that the application is reviewed
by the HoP Lead Development Management,
in consultation with the Chairman of the Committee, and if no
progress is being made delegated authority is given to the
HoP to refuse to application in the
absence of an agreed S106 Agreement

During discussion, Members requested an additional condition
regarding community space, to be confirmed at Reserved Matters
stage, and a further condition regarding the buildings being zero
carbon construction.

Committee
Decision:Delegate to HoP Lead
Development Management, in conjunction with Chairman to
conditionally grant planning permission, subject to a Section 106
legal obligation.

However,
in the event that the Section 106 legal Agreement remains unsigned
six months after this resolution, that the application is reviewed
by the HoP Lead Development Management,
in consultation with the Chairman of the Committee, and if no
progress is being made delegated authority is given to the
HoP to refuse to application in the
absence of an agreed S106 Agreement

Conditions:

1. Reserved matters time

2. Reserved Matters details

3. Accord with plans

4. Surface water drainage strategy prior to
commencement

5. Surface water adoption and maintenance strategy
prior to commencement

6. Construction phase drainage strategy prior to
commencement

7. Details of connection to and condition of
receiving watercourse prior to commencement

During discussion, Members referred to their site visit and also
took account of the strong support of the Parish
Council. Members felt that the proposal
would attract a different type of tourist and provide opportunities
for tourism other than the prohibitively expensive option of
renting a house in the area.

Committee Decision: Conditional Approval

Reasons:

Low key low impact form of tourism, well hidden in the valley and
would not spoil the landscape.
Exceptional circumstances for approval of the proposal in the AONB
being that the proposal cannot be seen, no additional parking
required.

During discussion, Members referred to the site inspection and
noted that whilst the proposed extension to the front of the
dwelling was acceptable, there were concerns over the extension to
the back and the potential overlooking that would result.

Committee Decision:Refusal

Reasons:

The proposed rear
extension by reason of its size and rearward projection would
result in an unacceptable overbearing impact and unacceptable loss
of amenity adversely impacting upon the neighbouring properties,
Nos. 7 and 9 Crestway. The development
is, therefore, contrary to Policy DP3 of the Council’s
adopted Local Development Framework, Development Policies
Development Plan Document and Policies DEV1,DEV2 and DEV20 of the
emerging Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan.

h)1189/18/HHO Orchard Barn,
Ermington

Parish: Ermington

Householder application for re-location of access and extension to
dwelling